REPORT OF THE MEETING€¦ · Fifteenth Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for the...

UNITED

NATIONS

Fifteenth Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for

the Caribbean Environment Programme and Twelfth

Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention for

the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment

of the Wider Caribbean Region

Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 25 to 27 October 2012

REPORT OF THE MEETING

EP

United Nations

Environment

Programme

Distr. LIMITED

UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.33/5

25 March 2013

Original: ENGLISH

Original: English


Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms……………………………………………………………………………………………………….... iii

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 1

Agenda Item 1: Opening of the Meeting ...................................................................................................... 2

Agenda Item 2: Organization of the Meeting .............................................................................................. 3

2.1. Rules of Procedure ....................................................................................................... 3

2.2. Election of Officers ...................................................................................................... 3

2.3. Organization of Work .................................................................................................. 3

Agenda Item 3: Adoption of the Agenda ...................................................................................................... 4

Agenda Item 4: Report of the Chairperson of the Monitoring Committee and President of the Bureau of

Contracting Parties .............................................................................................................. 4

Agenda Item 5: Report of the Executive Director of UNEP on the Implementation of the Caribbean

Environment Programme Workplan (2010-2012) and Budget ............................................ 4

Agenda Item 6: Workplan and Budget for the Caribbean Environment Programme for the

2013-2014 Biennium .......................................................................................................... 10

Agenda Item 7: Election of Members of the Monitoring Committee on the Action Plan for the Caribbean

Environment Programme for 2013-2014 Biennium ........................................................... 14

Agenda Item 8: Other Business .................................................................................................................... 14

Agenda Item 9: Adoption of the Report of the Meeting ............................................................................... 17

Agenda Item 10: Closure of the Meeting........................................................................................................ 17

Annex I: Agenda

Annex II Recommendations of 6th

Meeting of RAC/REMPEITC-Caribe

Annex III Decisions of the Seventh Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the SPAW Protocol

Annex IV Decisions of the First Meeting of LBS COP

Annex V Decisions of the Fifteenth Intergovernmental Meeting

Annex VI: Proposed Contributions for the Biennium 2013-2014

Annex VII: List of Documents

Annex VIII: List of Participants

Annex IX: Draft Resolution proposed by the Government of Mexico


Page iii

ACRONYMS

AFMO Administrative/Funds Management Officer

AMEP Assessment and Management of Environmental Pollution

BWM Ballast Water Management

CABI CAB International

CaMPAM Caribbean Marine Protected Areas Managers Network

CARICOM Caribbean Community

CARSEA Caribbean Sea Ecosystem Assessment

CATHALAC Water Centre for the Humid Tropics of Latin America and the Caribbean

CAWASA Caribbean Water and Sewage Association

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CEHI Caribbean Environmental Health Institute

CEP Caribbean Environment Programme

CETA Communication, Education, Training and Awareness

CHM Clearing House Mechanism

CITES Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

CLME Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Project

CMS Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

COP Conference of Parties

CORALINA Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andres, Old

Providence and Santa Catalina

CTF Caribbean Trust Fund

CWWA Caribbean Water and Wastewater Association

EBM Ecosystem-Based Management

ETA Education, Training and Awareness

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN

GCFI Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute

GCRMN Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network

GEF-CEO Global Environment Facility – Chief Executive Officer

GEF-CreW Global Environment Facility – Caribbean Regional Fund for Wastewater Management

GEF-IWCAM Global Environment Facility – Integrating Watershed and Costal Area Management

GEF-REPCar Global Environment Facility – Reducing Pesticide Run-off to the Caribbean Sea

GIS Geographic Information System

GlobalGAP Global Partnership for Good Agricultural Practices

IAC Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

IAS Invasive Alien Species

ICC International Coastal Clean-up

ICRI International Coral Reef Initiative

IDB Inter-American Development Bank

IGM Intergovernmental Meeting

IMA Institute of Marine Affairs

IMO-ITCP International Maritime Organization – Integrated Technical Co-operation Programme

IOCARIBE Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission‟s Sub-commission for the Caribbean and

Adjacent Regions

ISO International Organization for Standardization

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature

IWC International Whaling Commission

IW:LEARN International Waters: Learning Exchange and Resources Network

IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management

KAP Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices

KWN Know-Why Network


Page iv

LAC-GEO Latin America and the Caribbean – Global Environment Outlook

LBS Land-based Sources of Marine Pollution

LFMC Local Forest Management Committee

LME Large Marine Ecosystem

MAIA MPA Network of the Atlantic Arc

MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

MEA Multilateral Environment Agreement

MedPAN Mediterranean Marine Protected Area Network

MMAP Marine Mammals Action Plan

MPA-MMA Marine Protected Area – Management of Marine Area

NEPT Negril Environment Protection Trust

NFWF National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NPA National Plan of Action

OCCC Overall Coordination and Common Costs

OECS-ESDU Organization of Eastern Caribbean States – Environment and Sustainable Development

Unit

OPRC Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation

PAHO Pan American Health Organization

PANOS Panos Institute

PCG Project Coordinating Group

PIF Project Identification Form

PIMS Project Information Management System

PMU Project Management Unit

POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants

ProEcoServ Project for Ecosystem Services

PSC Project Steering Committee

PSC Project Support Costs

RAC Regional Activity Centre

RAC-CIMAB Regional Activity Centre – Centre for Engineering and Environmental Management of

Coasts and Bays

RAC-REMPEITC Regional Activity Centre – Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Information and

Training Centre

RAC-SPAW Regional Activity Centre – Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance

RAPMaLi Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter

REEF Reef Environmental Education Foundation

ROLAC UNEP‟s Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean

RONA UNEP‟s Regional Office for North America

RTAG Regional Technical Advisory Group

SAICM Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management

SCSCB Society for the Conservation and Study of Caribbean Birds

SIDS Small Island Developing States

SPAW Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife

STAC Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee

Stand-Op Standardization and Optimization

STRAP Sea Turtle Recovery Action Plan

TCC Technical Cooperation exercise among Countries

TNC The Nature Conservancy

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNECLAC UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

UNEP-CAR/RCU United Nations Environment Programme – Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit

UNEP-DEPI United Nations Environment Programme – Division of Environmental Policy

Implementation


Page v

UNEP-DGEF UNEP – Division of Global Environment Facility

UNEP-GPA United Nations Environment Programme – Global Programme of Action

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNOPS United Nations Office of Project Services

UNV United Nations Volunteer

UNU-INWEH United Nations University – Institute for Water, Environment and Health

WCR Wider Caribbean Region

WDCS Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

WECAFC Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission

WHMSI Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative

WIDECAST Wider Caribbean Sea Turtle Conservation Network


Page 1

REPORT OF THE MEETING

1. Introduction

1. The Fifteenth Intergovernmental Meeting (IGM) on the Action Plan for the Caribbean Environment Programme and Twelfth Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention for the Protection and

Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region was convened from 25 – 27 October

2012 in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic.

2. This Meeting proposed to review the achievements of the Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP) during the 2010-2012 period and to approve the Workplan and Budget of the Caribbean Environment Programme

(CEP) for the 2013-2014 Biennium.

3. The Secretariat, on behalf of the CEP Governments and Contracting Parties to the Cartagena Convention, convened the Meeting to:

Evaluate the projects and activities implemented within the framework of the Caribbean Environment Programme during the period 2010-2012;

Review the progress made in the implementation of the Decisions of the Fourteenth Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for the Caribbean Environment Programme and Eleventh Meeting of the

Contracting Parties to the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of

the Wider Caribbean Region, Montego Bay, Jamaica, 6-9 October 2010;

Review and take action, as appropriate, on the Decisions of the Seventh Meeting of the Contracting Parties (COP) to the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) in the Wider

Caribbean Region, Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 23 October 2012;

Review and take action, as appropriate, on the Decisions of the First Meeting of the Contracting Parties (COP) to the Protocol Concerning Pollution from Land-Based Sources and Activities (LBS) in the Wider

Caribbean Region, Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 24 October 2012;

Review the recommendations of and take action, as appropriate, on the Report of the Sixth Meeting of the Steering Committee to the Protocol Concerning Cooperation in Combating Oil Spills in the Wider

Caribbean Region, Willemstad, Curaçao, 7-9 May 2012;

Review and adopt the Workplan and Budget for CEP for the 2013-2014 biennium, including those of the Regional Activity Centres; and

Decide on the composition of the Monitoring Committee and the Bureau of Contracting Parties for the 2013-2014 Biennium.

4. National focal points or their designated representatives of all States and Territories participating in the Caribbean Environment Programme and the Commission of the European Union were invited to attend the

Meeting. Other States that have demonstrated concern for the protection of the marine environment of the

Wider Caribbean Region (WCR), UN and non-UN regional and international organizations, NGOs, donors

and private sector representatives participating or interested in the Caribbean Environment Programme, were

also invited to attend the Meeting as observers. Regional and international experts were also invited to make

special presentations to the Meeting. The List of Participants is included in Annex VIII of this Report.


Page 2

AGENDA ITEM 1: OPENING OF THE MEETING

5. Opening statements were provided by Mr. Nelson Andrade Colmenares, Coordinator of the Caribbean Environment Programme and the Cartagena Convention; by Ms. Jacqueline Alder, Coordinator, Freshwater and

Marine Ecosystems Branch, Division of Environmental Policy Implementation (DEPI), Nairobi, on behalf of

the Executive Director of UNEP, Mr. Achim Steiner; and by Ms. Ydalia Acevedo Monegro, Vice-Minister for

Coastal and Marine Resources, of the Government of the Dominican Republic, who declared the meeting

opened at 9:30 am at the Dreams Palm Beach Resort in Punta Cana.

6. Mr. Nelson Andrade Colmenares thanked the Government of the Dominican Republic for its valuable financial and logistical support which made possible the convening of this Meeting in Punta Cana as well as three other

intergovernmental meetings of CEP also held in Punta Cana during the same week. He welcomed all delegates,

specially invited guests, partners, donors and friends of the Caribbean Environment Programme to the Fifteenth

Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for the Caribbean Environment Programme and the Twelfth

Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Cartagena Convention for the Protection and Development of the

Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region.

7. Mr. Andrade Colmenares remarked that it was evident that, 26 years after its entry into force, the Cartagena Convention remains of great relevance to Member States of the Wider Caribbean Region and pointed out that

only three out of the 28 possible Member States to the Convention have not yet acceded to it. He acknowledged

that the SPAW Protocol continues to attract the support of the Wider Caribbean Governments with the

ratification of The Bahamas and Grenada during the reporting period, bringing the total to 16 Contracting

Parties since its entry into force in the year 2000. The LBS Protocol, adopted in 1999, is enjoying renewed vigor

as shown by the ratification by the Governments of The Bahamas, Antigua and Barbuda, Guyana and Grenada

during the reporting period, which brought the Protocol into force in 2010 with the First Meeting of the Parties

held immediately prior to the present 15th

Intergovernmental Meeting of the CEP.During his remarks he

acknowledged the support received from the four Regional Activity Centres: namely the Regional Marine

Pollution Emergency Information and Training Centre, the Regional Activity Centre for the Specially

Protected Areas and Wildlife Protocol, the Centre of Engineering and Environmental Management of

Coasts and Bays, and the Institute of Marine Affairs. He equally expressed appreciation for the countries

which host these centres in the region, respectively Curacao, France, Cuba and Trinidad and Tobago, with

financial resources as well as the secondment of staff. The Governments of Spain and Italy were recognized

for their support to the activities of the SPAW Programme related to marine mammals and marine protected

areas.

8. He highlighted that among the main accomplishments for the biennium was the successful completion of the GEF-funded projects “Reducing Pesticide Run-off to the Caribbean Sea” (REPCar) and “Integrating

Watershed and Coastal Areas Management” (IWCAM), which were implemented in close cooperation with

United Nations and regional organizations, as well as private sector partners in the region, to deliver

tangible benefits to local communities. The CEP is the executing agency for the Caribbean Regional Fund

for Wastewater Management (CReW) as a GEF IDB-lead Project and has finalized a new full project

proposal to the GEF as a follow-up to the GEF-funded Integrating Watershed and Coastal Areas

Management (IWCAM) called “IW Eco” to address land, water and biodiversity management in the region.

The hosting of the GEF International Waters Conference in 2013 by the CEP will provide an opportunity to

feature such progresses achieved by the CEP and the implementation of the Cartagena Convention.

9. Ms. Jacqueline Alder, conveyed the appreciation of the Executive Director of UNEP to the Government of the Dominican Republic for hosting the meetings. She stressed the importance of the present IGM as this year,

2012, has been a golden one for oceans and coasts. The Rio+20 Conference and the outcome document The

Future We Want highlights through 20 paragraphs the importance of oceans and coasts, as well as SIDS for

sustainable development. The Caribbean Environment Programme is one of UNEP's key Regional Seas and

the leadership it provides in bringing together various programmes and partners to tackle the issues facing

Parties to the Cartagena Convention, is a valuable example in maintaining the Regional Seas Programmes a

UNEP flagship.

10. She informed the meeting that at the Third Intergovernmental Review on the Implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land Based Activities (GPA)


Page 3

(Manila, 25-27 January 2012), Member States gave UNEP as the Secretariat, a clear mandate through the

Manila Declaration to focus on marine debris, nutrients and wastewater over the next five years. These three

mandates also fall within the mandates of Regional Seas Programmes including the Cartagena Convention.

UNEP had been advancing two of the three mandates - marine debris and nutrients - through the development

of partnership Programmes. The Marine Debris Partnership was initiated at the Honolulu Conference on

Marine Debris in 2010 and launched at Rio+20 this year. UNEP also leads a global nutrient partnership and

will hold a meeting in the Caribbean region in 2013 in conjunction with the CEP.

11. Vice-Minister Ydalia Acevedo Monegro, representing the Government of the Dominican Republic, welcomed delegates and partners to Punta Cana and to the 15th Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for the

Caribbean Environment Programme and Twelfth Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention for the

Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region. She reaffirmed the

commitment of the Dominican Republic in continuing to support the CEP, reiterating that the Regional Seas

Programme can be considered a significant icon for the sustainability of world coastal and marine waters.

Particularly, it has strengthened marine protected areas, the protection of endangered and vulnerable species as

well as critical ecosystems in the Dominican Republic such as the Marine Mammal Sanctuary of La Plata and

Navidad Banks.

AGENDA ITEM 2: ORGANIZATION OF THE MEETING

2.1) Rules of Procedure

12. The Meeting agreed to apply mutatis mutandis the Rules of Procedure for the Meetings of the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena

Convention), as contained in document UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.30/4/Rev.2.

2.2) Election of Officers

13. The Meeting elected from among its participants the following officers: the Chairperson, three Vice-Chairpersons and a Rapporteur. These officers will form the Bureau of Contracting Parties for the period until

the Sixteenth Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for the Caribbean Environment Programme and

Thirteenth Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention for the Protection and Development of the

Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region is convened. The President of the Bureau shall also serve

as Chairman of the Monitoring Committee.

14. The Meeting elected from among the experts the following officers of the Meeting:

Chairperson: Ydalia Acevedo Monegro (Dominican Republic)

First Vice-Chairperson: Paul Phillip (Grenada)

Second Vice-Chairperson: Karim Hodge (UK)

Third Vice-Chairperson: Leila Villatoro (Guatemala)

Rapporteur: Elizabeth Taylor Jay (Colombia)

2.3) Organization of Work

15. English, French and Spanish were the working languages of the Meeting. Simultaneous interpretation in these languages was provided by the Secretariat for the plenary sessions. The working documents of the Meeting

were available in all the working languages. It was noted that the report of the Meeting will be adopted in

English and the Decisions of the Meeting in the three working languages. The Meeting also elected to adopt its

hours of work as reflected in the order of the day, and such other arrangements of a procedural or

organizational nature as deemed necessary.


Page 4

AGENDA ITEM 3: ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

16. The Meeting was invited to adopt the Agenda of the Meeting as contained in document UNEP (DEPI)/CAR IG.33/1, as well as the working hours and other procedural and organizational matters.

17. The government of Mexico expressed its intention to raise the need for discussion on the topic referring to the involvement of Parties in the recruitment processes of the Coordinator, as per Decision VI of the 14

th IGM and

11th

Conference of the Parties of the Cartagena Convention, and after clarification from the Chairperson, it was

agreed that the issue be raised again under agenda item 8 “Other Business”.

18. After such clarifications, the Agenda was adopted with the addition from the Government of Mexico under agenda item 8, as presented in Annex I of this Report.

AGENDA ITEM 4: REPORT OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE MONITORING COMMITTEE AND

PRESIDENT OF THE BUREAU OF CONTRACTING PARTIES

19. The outgoing President of the Bureau of Contracting Parties and Chairman of the Monitoring Committee, Ms. Paulette Kolbusch, Senior Manager, National Environment and Planning Agency, Jamaica, presented her

report for the 2010-2012 biennium. She began by congratulating the CEP Coordinator and the staff of the

Secretariat, the Regional Activity Centres and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) Project Management

Units for their achievements and continued efforts to respond to emerging needs of the Wider Caribbean.

20. She highlighted the successes of the projects funded by the GEF, the increased numbers of ratifications to the Cartagena Convention and its Protocols and the challenges ahead that needed to be addressed to ensure

financial sustainability of the Caribbean Environment Programme. Ms. Kolbusch encouraged the Secretariat to

continue to play a leading role in coordinating and ensuring synergies between regional projects implemented

in the Wider Caribbean, mobilizing partners and working closely with the private sector.

21. In the area of financial sustainability, she applauded the efforts of member Governments in their payment of arrears and invited them to expand such contributions, also in mobilizing donors and external sources.

Ms. Kolbusch recognized the significant support of the Governments of Curaçao, France, the United States of

America, and Trinidad and Tobago in support of the RACs. With regard to the proposed Workplan and

budget for the 2013-2014 biennium, she suggested that realistic targets and priorities be set and emphasis

placed on projects resulting in the greatest impacts and benefits regionally and nationally. Ecosystem-based

management, green and blue economies and resource evaluation are some of the challenges emanating from

Rio+20 deliberations for the development agenda of many countries in the region.

22. In conclusion, she thanked all delegates for their support and wished the incoming chair, Ms. Ydalia Acevedo Monegro from the Government of the Dominican Republic, best wishes during her tenure.

AGENDA ITEM 5: REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UNEP ON THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CARIBBEAN ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME

(2010-2012) AND BUDGET

23. The Chairperson invited the Secretariat to present the Report of the Executive Director of the Cartagena Convention on the Implementation of the 2010–2012 Workplan of the Caribbean Environment Programme, as

contained in document UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.33/INF.4, including implementation of the Decisions of the

Fourteenth Intergovernmental and Eleventh Meeting of the Contracting Parties (Montego Bay, Jamaica, 6-9

October 2010).


Page 5

24. In his presentation Mr. Andrade Colmenares covered the implementation of the work programme for the 2010-

2012 biennium, the budgetary status, and administration and human resources management at the Secretariat.

25. He reiterated that CEP projects and activities continue to support its mission to promote regional co-operation for the protection and development of the Wider Caribbean Region (WCR) and its long term objective of

achieving sustainable development of marine and coastal resources in the WCR through effective, integrated

management that allows for economic growth and sustainable livelihoods.

26. The Secretariat has taken appropriate actions in response to the Decisions of the Fourteenth Intergovernmental Meeting and other CEP intergovernmental or technical meetings and these were implemented within the work

programme for 2010-2012 (Annex I, UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.33/INF.4).

27. Staffing at UNEP-CAR/RCU currently includes a total of 14 staff members (the Coordinator, two professional officers, and nine general service/locally recruited staff financed under the Caribbean Trust Fund; and one

Fund Management Officer and one Finance Assistant (funded through the programme support costs). There is

one project post at the general service level and one long-term consultant at the professional equivalent,

financed through external funding, under the GEF project on the Caribbean Regional Fund for Wastewater

Management (GEF/CReW).

28. The Secretariat has actively pursued the collection of pledges to the Caribbean Trust Fund (CTF), including the collection of outstanding pledges. The Secretariat collected a total of US$2,033,428 in 2010-2011 and

US$1,311,016 (as at 31st July) in 2012. This compares to US$2,341,505 in 2008-2009, US$2,484,022 for

2006-2007; and US$2,517,328 for 2004-2005.

29. Whilst the amounts collected in 2010-2011 seem to have reduced compared to previous biennia, 2012 has seen a significant improvement in payment of pledges and arrears in just the first half of the year. Successful

innovative strategies continued during the last biennium to help address ongoing financial constraints

including: encouraging governments to make in-kind contributions through hosting of meetings and

workshops and mobilizing direct bilateral support for unfunded and new project activities in the region, with

such costs being offset against their unpaid pledges to the CTF (Annex III, UNEP (DEPI) CAR IG.33/INF.4).

30. Additional support was provided by several Governments for the convening of CEP meetings and workshops. This includes the Government of the Dominican Republic (US$200,000 in lieu of their arrears) to host the

present Cartagena Convention COP/IGM and the COPs of the LBS and SPAW Protocols, as well as the

SPAW STAC. Governments, notably also Aruba, which supported the convening of the First LBS STAC

Meeting, have continued to provide in-kind support within their capacities for national and regional workshops

as contribution to the implementation of CEP‟s Workplan.

31. Other CEP member-Governments, especially those with unpaid pledges, are encouraged to make regular and timely payments to the Trust Fund. In challenging situations, Member Governments are also called to

consider hosting of CEP meetings and workshops in the future to offset their financial arrears. This will allow

for programme continuity and a more effective response by the Secretariat, to the needs of member

Governments.

32. In his presentation, he renewed the Secretariat's recognition for the cooperation shown by many other Governments who provided support and extraordinary contributions to facilitate the implementation of the

2010-2012 work programme. He noted the continued support provided by the Governments of Cuba, France,

Trinidad and Tobago and the former Netherlands Antilles, now Curaçao (as of 10 October 2010) for hosting the

Regional Activity Centres (RACs). Additionally, the Secretariat thanked the Governments of France and the

United States of America for seconding experts to the Regional Centre for Oil Spills (RAC-REMPEITC) in

Curaçao and looks forward to their continued support.

33. Mr. Andrade Colmenares summarized the status of ratifications of the Cartagena Convention and its Protocols, welcoming the ratifications during the reporting period for the LBS Protocol by the Governments

of Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Guyana and Grenada and for the SPAW Protocol by the

Governments of The Bahamas and Grenada.


Page 6

34. The Delegate of Honduras expressed the intention of her Government to explore accession to the Cartagena

Convention and its Protocols, requesting further information on this process and costs involved. The

Secretariat thanked the Government of Honduras for its interest and informed the Meeting that it would

follow-up bilaterally on this issue with the Government of Honduras.

35. The Coordinator invited the Secretariat„s Programme Officers and Team Assistant to report on the progress of their respective programmes: AMEP, SPAW and CETA.

36. The AMEP Programme Officer, Mr. Christopher Corbin, presented the outputs of the AMEP Sub-programme during the 2010-2012 reporting period, as contained in document UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.33/3. He

highlighted that the projects and activities supported two key objectives: pollution prevention and reduction,

and information management.

37. Mr. Corbin began his overview by outlining the goal and specific objectives of the AMEP sub-programme in support of the implementation of the LBS and Oil Spills Protocols and highlighted the significant contribution

to the programme‟s achievements from the implementation of the GEF funded projects and through the work

of the LBS and Oil Spills Regional Activity Centres. He reflected on the continued progress in the ratification

of the LBS Protocol in the region with a total of 10 Contracting Parties and the successful convening of the 1st

Conference of Parties for the LBS Protocol. Specific mention was made of fund raising efforts, a summary of

overall expenditures, and the level of effort required for programme coordination by the Secretariat.

38. Mr. Corbin reported on some of the major sub-programme achievements during the reporting period including: (1) Entry into force of the LBS Protocol in 2010; (2) Development of new CEP Technical Reports; (3) Success

of the GEF IWCAM and REPCar Projects; (4) Regional LBS Collage Competition; (5) Development of UNEP

CEP web site as a Clearing House Mechanism; (6) Initial approval of a new follow up project proposal to

IWCAM – IW Eco; (7) Implementation of the CReW Project to address wastewater; (8) The outputs of the

Interim Working Group on Monitoring and Assessment, specifically the State of the Convention Area Report

(SOCAR) outline, (9) Entering into force of the Special Area Designation for the Caribbean Sea under

MARPOL Annex V and (10) Development of a GIS-based data base of the Maritime Traffic in the Wider

Caribbean Region.

39. The main outputs from project implementation activities were presented under the specific thematic areas of monitoring and assessment, wastewater management, watershed management, solid waste management,

national programmes of action, climate change and disaster risk management and oil spills planning. He

highlighted some of the major national and regional achievements in each of these thematic areas. The

achievements of the GEF REPCar and GEF IWCAM projects, including lessons learned were further

highlighted and he commended the respective project managers and their staff for their dedication and

commitment.

40. Mr. Corbin briefly presented information on the activities of the GEF CReW project which held its inception workshop in February 2012. He encouraged countries who had endorsed this project to maximize

opportunities to facilitate LBS Protocol implementation through project activities in particular in support of

Annex III of the Protocol.

41. The two LBS Regional Activity Centres were invited to provide additional information on specific activities in support of the LBS Protocol during the 2010-2012 period. Mr. Antonio Villasol, Director of RAC-Cimab,

specifically referred to the planning and execution of the Final Workshop on Heavily Contaminated Bays and

the Baseline Assessment of Domestic Wastewater in Selected Areas of the Wider Caribbean Region carried

out from April 2010 to December 2010. He also highlighted the execution of a workshop to review and update

wastewater management related legislation, from 30 October to 1 November 2011. Mr. Villasol noted that

RAC-Cimab produced fact sheets in English, Spanish and French which provide information on the results of

the updated CEP Technical Report No. 33, the Know-Why Network project and Baseline Analysis of

Domestic Wastewater. A brochure was also produced and disseminated in English and Spanish on Wastewater

Management Technologies in the WCR, as well as DVDs.

42. He thanked RAC-IMA, UNEP CAR/RCU and the United States of America for reviewing and providing comments on the update of Technical Report No. 33, now Technical Report No. 52 and the input of many

other countries including Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Colombia.


Page 7

43. He noted the financial contribution by RAC- Cimab towards the contaminated bays workshop and for the

review of National legislation and highlighted the update of maps on the state of the ratification of the

Convention and the LBS, SPAW and Oil Spills Protocols. Ms. Amoy Lum Kong, Director of the RAC-IMA

presented on the activities of the RAC and indicated that the RAC was involved in three (3) main activities

during the period. These activities included participation in the Interim Technical Working group on

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment; participation in Regional Experts Workshop on Environmental

Monitoring and Assessment and; the Production and Dissemination of Promotional Material. Ms. Lum Kong

highlighted the objectives of the Technical Working Group and the Regional Workshop, as well as the

activities and outputs of the working group and face to face workshop. She noted that promotional material

was produced including a 12-minute DVD which had the objective to inform the public of CEP and the

Cartagena Convention and to facilitate increased support to CEP. She noted that RAC-IMA provided

comments during preparation of the Summary of National Programmes of Action (NPAs), and was involved in

the development of the NPA in Trinidad and Tobago. Ms. Lum Kong expressed that RAC- IMA would like to

take a more leadership role in future projects and activities of the LBS Protocol.

44. Mr. Corbin also invited Ms. Anne Reglain representing RAC- REMPEITC to present additional detail concerning the development and use of the GIS-based data base for mapping maritime traffic in the Wider

Caribbean Region.

45. Mr. Corbin concluded by mentioning some of the challenges and lessons learnt during the biennium and suggested areas that the IGM may wish to recommend on including: LBS Protocol ratification/promotion,

GPA implementation, mobilization of financial resources, development of new projects and partnerships, how

to enhance work in non-GEF eligible countries, next steps for the development of a State of the Convention

Area Report (SOCAR) and future priority activities for AMEP Sub-programme..

46. The Chairperson invited Ms. Alessandra Vanzella-Khouri of the Secretariat to present the results of implementation of the SPAW Sub-programme during the 2010-2012 reporting period, as contained in

document UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.33/3.

47. Ms. Vanzella-Khouri began her overview by outlining the goal and specific objectives of the SPAW sub-programme in support of the implementation of the SPAW Protocol. She highlighted the sub-programme‟s

achievements for the five major areas of activities: Programme Coordination, Strengthening of Protected Areas

in the Wider Caribbean Region, Development of Guidelines for Protected Areas and Species Management;

Conservation of Threatened and Endangered Species; and Conservation and Sustainable Use of Coastal and

Marine Ecosystems. She emphasized that most projects and activities were carried out in close cooperation

with the SPAW-RAC in Guadeloupe as per the “Report of the SPAW Regional Activity Centre (SPAW-RAC)

in Guadeloupe: RAC Operations and Budget for the period 2010-2012” (UNEP (DEPI)/CAR WG.34/INF.4),

reiterating, with much appreciation, that the SPAW-RAC is fully funded by the Government of France. She

also thanked the SPAW-RAC for the detailed presentation made on their implementation of activities during

the biennium at the SPAW COP7 which were fundamental for the successful progress in the achievement of

the SPAW Sub-Programme´s objectives..

48. Major funds raised and allocated included an important grant of US$ 1.1 million received from the Government of Italy for a two year project to assist with the strengthening of MPAs in support of the Caribbean Challenge

Initiative.. These activities on protected areas strengthening, included technical assistance through 18 grants

(totalling US $600,000) for MPAs, as well as training and capacity building on marine protected areas

management, all executed through CaMPAM as reflected in the detailed update provided by the Secretariat in

UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/INF.5. This included over 320 MPA practitioners from 15 countries of the region

trained through both regional and local courses on different aspects of MPA management, exchanges on better

practices between fishers and MPA managers, training on PAs sustainable finance mechanisms; updating of the

regional MPA database with online applicability and maintaining communications and information exchange

among the CaMPAM members through the electronic forum.

49. The process for listing Protected Areas under SPAW Protocol has proceeded by the respective Working Group established with this purpose and coordinated by the SPAW-RAC, as reported under UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG

34/3. This has enabled the listing of the first 18 Protected Areas under the Protocol as was just approved by the

SPAW COP7 which concluded earlier in the week. The work on application of the criteria for listing of species


Page 8

has progressed (UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/4) and a guidance document on the criteria and process for the

assessment of exemptions to Article 11 (2) of the SPAW Protocol has been developed by the dedicated

Working group and presented to the SPAW COP 7 for review and tentative adoption pending final internal

consultations by Member States (UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/5).

50. Ms. Vanzella-Khouri also reported on the various inter-agency collaborations, such as with WIDECAST, SCSCB and CABI in the areas of sea turtle conservation, bird conservation and invasive alien species

respectively. She highlighted the efforts developed by the Secretariat to tackle the issue of the lionfish invasion

as summarized in UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/INF.8.

51. In her report she summarized the activities implemented under the Marine Mammal Action Plan (brief summary in UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/INF.6) which included significant progress on analysis and modeling of data for

24 species of cetaceans and the West Indies manatee under the UNEP/Spain LifeWeb Project on Broad-scale

Marine Spatial Planning for Marine Mammal Corridors and Transboundary Management. She acknowledged

the linkages to data from other sources (including from AMEP and CEP‟s Technical Report No. 33) to evaluate

the impacts of coastal development, shipping intensity, and cumulative human impacts. She also reported on

other activities implemented under the MMAP, such as the convening of a trilingual Workshop on Marine

Mammal Watching, capacity building for local stranding networks and the launching of a regional database

hosted on the SPAW-RAC's website.

52. To finalize her presentation, she reported on the GEF project for the sustainable management of the shared living marine resources of the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME), specifically on its component on

Management and Conservation of Reef Biodiversity and Fisheries implemented by the CEP, and on the pilot

projects implemented in that regard in four sites: Seaflower Biosphere Reserve in Colombia, Montecristi

National Park in the Dominican Republic, Pedro Bank in Jamaica, and Caracol Bay in Haiti. She noted that a

summary on the status of these activities was provided in UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/INF.7.

53. The Chairperson invited Ms. Chrishane Williams, AMEP/CETA Team Assistant to present the Status of Implementation of the Workplan for the Communication, Education, Training and Awareness (CETA) Sub-

programme for the period 2010-2012.

54. The overall and specific objectives of the CETA Sub-programme were outlined. These include activities and projects completed in accordance with the approved Workplan for the period 2010-2012 through joint activities

with the SPAW and AMEP Sub-programmes and their respective projects.

55. She emphasized that in an effort to improve access to information, there have been a number of improvements to the CEP website, with specific reference to the country information page, the development of an online Lab

Capacity Database, revamped meeting page, improved project websites and a general improvement in the

access to information on coastal and marine issues.

56. One of the most significant achievements she highlighted was the re-publication of a newly designed version of the Cartagena Convention and its Protocols which was distributed to Member States during the meeting.

57. Of particular importance were two environmental competitions that were organized and executed within the period, in honour of the International Year of Biodiversity (2010) and in celebration of the entry into force of

the LBS Protocol. These competitions engaged youth at national and regional levels and increased the visibility

of CEP. Resulting from the increased visibility of the CEP, several new partnerships were created with the

private and public sectors as well as with NGOs, institutions and media houses.

58. In the area of public education and outreach, she described the partnership with Panos Caribbean and the participation of the Secretariat in commemorative environmental occasions such as World Environment Day

and Sessions with Environmentalists. Various publications, including programme and project banners,

calendars, brochures and a promotional video and song for International Year of the Forests, were also

highlighted.


Page 9

59. The Internship Programme, welcomed approximately 15 interns over the period and was supported by a new

partnership with the University of Indiana, USA. This was recognized as being of great importance in

accomplishing the output of the Secretariat and the fulfillment of the 2010-2012 Workplans given limited

human resources especially for supporting CETA activities.

60. The delegate from Cuba congratulated the Secretariat on the valuable work in creating environmental awareness, and stated that she would be providing updated information on national links to update the page of

the Government of Cuba and remove the existing links. .

61. The Secretariat appealed to country delegates to communicate updated information on their various technical and political focal points and to advise of any subsequent changes.

62. The Chairperson invited Ms. Annie Muchai, the Fund Management Officer, to present the financial performance of the Secretariat. She gave an overview of the receipts against approved contributions for 2010-

2012. The analysis reflected that as at August 2012, an estimated 89% of the pledges/contributions and arrears

for 2010-2011 had been paid. In 2012, collections rested at 38% as at August 2012. However, she highlighted

that a number of countries had indicated that their payments were forthcoming and the collection rate was

expected to rise to an estimated 80% by the end of the year. She further reiterated that 2012 had seen a

tremendous improvement in the collection of pledges and arrears for previous years.

63. She presented the expenditures over the last two and a half years (total US$3,111,852 from January 2010 to June 2012), indicating that the years of major meetings (COPs/IGM) reflected a much higher expenditure. In

comparing the expenditures against the approved contributions, 2010 saw a deficit of US$144,606 while 2011

reflected a surplus as there was no major meeting that year. In 2012, the expenditures would be less than in

2010, given that costs to the meetings of the COPs/IGM were offset by the Government of the Dominican

Republic, in reduction of their arrears.

64. Ms. Muchai reiterated the challenge on maintaining an adequate budget and that most activities were supported through other counterpart/earmarked contributions as well as in-kind support. In addition, a number of

operating costs had been offset by apportioning and charging these to the projects as appropriate which made

major savings to the Caribbean Trust Fund to almost US$200,000 in the biennium 2010-2011.

65. She indicated that the financial position of the Caribbean Trust Fund was US$3,915,417 in 2010. The projected cash balance as at December 2012 would be an estimated US$1.7 million. With the current projected budget

and if contributions were maintained at the same level and all paid, there would be just the minimum reserve to

operate for about six months after the biennium. She thus highlighted the need to ensure that the reserve be

maintained at a minimum of US$1M.

66. Ms. Muchai took the opportunity to inform the meeting on the UN‟s move to the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS), which sets out the requirements for recognizing, measuring, presenting and

disclosing information for transactions and events of an organization on a full accrual basis. She indicated that

this was mandated by the need to comply with the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and

highlighted that this system would support better accountability and transparency of resources and liabilities.

UNEP deadline to be IPSAS compliant is January 2014.

67. The CEP organigram presented (as depicted in UNEP(DEPI) CAR WG.33/INF.4) highlighted the staff changes in the past biennium. Ms. Muchai explained that as a result of a shortfall in funds, the Secretariat was not able to

be fully staffed, with the position of Deputy-Coordinator remaining vacant as a result of the shortfall in funds.

The Secretariat has reduced operation costs, through for example, reducing paper use by having paperless

meetings. Ms. Muchai closed her presentation by making an appeal to country delegates to increase their

pledges to the Caribbean Trust Fund to fully support the work of the Secretariat for the 2013-2014 biennium.

68. The Chairperson thanked the Secretariat for the very comprehensive presentations and opened the floor for comments.

69. The delegate from Mexico requested that more details be presented in future budgets. She also requested that details of the 2011-2012 budget on expenditures such as salaries, consultancies, travel etc., as provided by the

Secretariat to the Government of Mexico, be also included on UNEP CAR/RCU‟s website. The Secretariat


Page 10

advised that the CEP Workplan and Budget for 2010-2012 and that for 2013-2014 also contained details of the

budget. She informed the Meeting of the request from Mexico earlier in the year, which had been responded to

and that the Secretariat was ready to provide additional information on a case by case basis, given the unique

requests made by individual Member States.

70. The Meeting welcomed and commended the Secretariat, including the three RAC's for the extensive work carried out in the biennium, remarking its contribution to the sustainability of the Wider Caribbean coastal and

marine resources.

AGENDA ITEM 6: WORKPLAN AND BUDGET FOR THE CARIBBEAN ENVIRONMENT

PROGRAMME FOR THE 2013-2014 BIENNIUM

71. The Secretariat was invited by the Chairperson to present a summary of its 2013-2014 proposed Workplan contained in document UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.33/3 entitled “Draft Workplan and Budget for the Caribbean

Environment Programme for the 2013-2014 Biennium”.

72. The Meeting was also invited to review and endorse the following, including recommendations and decisions for further actions:

i. Sixth Ordinary Meeting of the Steering Committee of the Regional Activity Centre/Regional Marine

Pollution Emergency Information and Training Centre RAC/REMPEITC-Caribe (Willemstad, Curaҫao, 9-10 May 2012) (UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.33/4);

ii. First Meeting of the Scientific, Technical and Advisory Committee (STAC) to the Protocol Concerning Pollution from Land-Based Sources and Activities in the Wider Caribbean Region (Oranjestad, Aruba,

5-7 June 2012) (UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.33/4);

iii. Fifth Meeting of the Scientific, Technical and Advisory Committee (STAC) to the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) in the Wider Caribbean Region (Punta Cana, Dominican

Republic, 22 October 2012) (UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/7);

iv. Seventh Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) in the Wider Caribbean Region (Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 23 October 2012)

(UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.31/3); and

v. First Meeting of the Contracting Parties (COP) to the Protocol Concerning Pollution from Land-Based Sources and Activities (LBS) in the Wider Caribbean Region (Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 24

October 2012) (UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.32/4)

73. The delegate of Mexico noted that during the first day of the Meeting it was not mentioned that the meeting would be working with the approved Rules of Procedure of the Cartagena Convention. The Secretariat thanked

the Government of Mexico and reaffirmed that the meeting was indeed being conducted under such rules of

procedure as adopted by the Meeting and reflected in Agenda Item 2.1 of the present Report.

74. The Secretariat was then invited by the Chairperson to present the draft AMEP Workplan and Budget for the 2013-2014 Biennium in support of the Protocols concerning Pollution from Land-based Sources and Activities

(LBS Protocol) and the Oil Spills Protocol. The AMEP Programme Officer presented the proposed projects and

activities within the sub-programme as contained in document UNEP (DEPI)/CAR WG.33/3/Rev.2. He stated

that the work plan and budget covered activities to be developed under the Assessment and Management of

Environmental Pollution (AMEP) sub-programme of CEP with support of the two LBS RACs (Centro de

Ingeniería y Manejo Ambiental de Bahías y Costas-CIMAB, Cuba and Institute of Marine Affairs-IMA,

Trinidad and Tobago).

75. He reminded delegates of the main objectives of the AMEP sub-programme, notably to control, prevent and reduce pollution of the coastal and marine environment from land-based sources and highlighted the main

targets and expected impacts from implementation of the proposed projects and activities. He emphasized that

one of the main roles of the Secretariat was to ensure coordination, collaboration, cooperation and


Page 11

communication between focal points, regional and international organizations and in particular to develop new

partnerships with NGOs and the private sector.

76. Mr. Corbin highlighted the sub-programme priorities for the biennium including: Resource Mobilization through the development and implementation of Global Environment Facility funded Projects; Support of the

work of the Interim Technical Group on Monitoring and Assessment including the further development of the

State of Convention Area Report; Disseminate Information on Best Management Practices and appropriate

technologies including outreach to non-contracting Parties to the LBS Protocol to promote ratification/accession

of the LBS Protocol; and supporting the priority partnerships identified by the UNEP GPA in Marine Litter,

Nutrients and Wastewater.

77. A description of ongoing and proposed new projects and activities was then provided within the following nine thematic areas: Programme Coordination, Global Environment Facility Projects, Monitoring & Assessment,

Wastewater Management, Watershed Management, Waste Management, National Programmes of Action,

Climate Change and Disaster Risk Response and Oil Spills Planning. He reiterated that where no specific new

project activities had been proposed in the work plan, such as in the areas of watershed and wastewater

management, country support to LBS Protocol implementation will be provided through the GEF funded

projects. He also outlined the nature of the administrative and technical support that would be required from

UNEP CAR/RCU to ensure the effective implementation of the work programme. Additional information was

provided on the development of the GEF IWEco project – the follow up project to GEF IWCAM by the

Programme Director for the Caribbean Environmental Health Institute, Dr. Christopher Cox. CEHI is expected

to be one of the co-executing agencies for this new project along with the Secretariat.

78. In conclusion, Mr. Corbin provided a summary of the overall proposed budget highlighting the amount of funds to be requested from the Caribbean Trust Fund, the level of funding already mobilized and funding still

required. While he highlighted that most of the funds listed as unfunded related to the full-sized projects that

are under development and which will be submitted to the GEF for consideration, additional funds were still

needed for other proposed projects and activities and invited support of countries and partners to mobilize the

required funding.

79. The SPAW Programme Officer presented the draft “Workplan and Budget for the SPAW Subprogramme for 2013-2014 Biennium” also contained in UNEP(DEPI)/CAR WG.34/6, as it had been presented to the preceding

Fifth Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) Meeting of SPAW and approved by the Seventh

Meeting of the Contracting Parties to SPAW. She noted that the programme elements will remain the same as

the previous biennium, however prioritization of the elements will be selected based on emerging needs and the

financial resources available. In this context, the Programme Officer indicated that only 30% of the indicative

Budget has been raised so far. In light of that fact it was recommended by the Meeting that the Budget for 2013-

2014 be maintain the same level as 2010-2012, whilst recognising that additional funding sources can be

identified.

80. With regard to the coordination, it will continue to be led by a Programme Officer and an Assistant through the CAR/RCU Kingston Office. Additionally support will also be garnered through SPAW-RAC in Guadeloupe

which includes five (5) officers, fully supported by France.

81. Regarding strengthening of Protected Areas, emphasis on MPAs will continue through CaMPAM, with the assistance of a coordinator (if resources allow) and the SPAW-RAC. She further explained the updated capacity

building activities that will focus on sustainable finance, enforcement and alternative livelihoods. The Small

Grants programme is also forecasted to continue providing direct technical assistance to MPA needs.

82. She also noted that during 2013-2014, the SPAW Programme will follow-up on COP7 decisions to continue the activities relevant to the development of guidelines for protected areas and species. Following the approval by

SPAW COP7 of the seventeen (17) protected areas listed under SPAW, a cooperation programme will be

developed and more Contracting Parties urged to nominate their sites for listing. Parties were urged to

participate more actively in the Working Groups. Further development of the Guidance document on

exemptions to Article 11(2) of the Protocol will be extended during this period, to allow final internal

consultations by Member States on the core document before adoption, as well as further development by the

dedicated Working Group of the report formats on exemptions that are annexed to the Guidance document.


Page 12

Furthermore, the SPAW STAC5 recommended that the process of review of species to be listed under the

SPAW Protocol continued, utilising the Working Group and the IUCN Caribbean Red List as well as to include

face-to-face meetings as a mechanism for strengthening efficiency, and noting that Parties will then have to take

the lead to formally propose any modification of the annexes, based on the outputs of the Working Group or

other relevant sources of information.

83. She noted that species conservation priorities will be based on the Marine Mammal Action Plan (MMAP) priorities (see UNEP(DEPI)/CAR IG.34/INF.6). The SPAW STAC5 proposed to review and address those

priority topics under designated subgroups within the MMAP overall Working Group. Some of the proposed

elements for focus may include; (i) mitigating ship strikes and entanglements on whale and dolphin species in

the Wider Caribbean Region which will involve workshops with IWC, NOAA; (ii) further follow-up of the

LifeWeb project including corridors scenarios building and including outcomes of Inter-regional marine spatial

planning (MSP) and marine mammal Workshop, Panama, 21-24 May 2012; and (iii) fostering of a

Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC) between UNEP-CAR/RCU and the IWC.

84. Additionally, activities for the conservation of sea turtles are proposed in collaboration with the WIDECAST, such as support implementation of STRAPs in the for The Bahamas, Cuba, Grenada and Guyana,as well as

further support of STRAP implementation in Barbados, Belize, Dutch Caribbean and Saint Lucia. Other

activities include bird conservation capacity in collaboration with BirdLife, SCSCB, WHMSI.

85. In closing, she reiterated that the collaboration with various partners on the control of the lionfish will also be continued, particularly the dissemination by the SPAW-RAC of the Manual on Best Practices for the Control of

the Invasive Lionfish in English and Spanish, and further development of the Regional Lionfish Strategy.

86. She further informed that a proposal is currently being discussed with UNEP-DEPI for EBM capacity building and a project on EBA, to be implemented possibly in Grenada. The UNEP RS coral reef partnership will also be

explored for collaboration to protect coral reef ecosystem services, including strategic support to GCRMN

nodes. An important initiative of this component will be to re-engage dialogue with tourism private sector such

as cruise ships, and to develop a pilot project for more active engagement in marine conservation in cooperation

with SPAW-RAC and UNEP-DTIE.

87. The AMEP/CETA Team Assistant presented the CETA Workplan which highlighted the proposed projects and

activities to be implemented in the 2013-2014 biennium. These activities include continued support to the

Secretariat and the work of the AMEP and SPAW Sub-programmes and their projects. Meeting support was

outlined as a major aspect in the Workplan for the period 2013-2014, such as the CEP Intergovernmental

Meetings and GEF 7th

Biennial International Waters Conference

88. She mentioned the proposed recruitment of a National United Nations Volunteer position to assist with communication activities with financial support from the GEF IW: Learn Project. The CETA Sub-programme

will continue to facilitate the execution of the GEF IW: Learn project including the convening of two regional

workshops and promoting project exchanges. Implementation of the CETA continues without a dedicated

Programme Officer to accomplish the specific objectives of the sub-programme

89. She mentioned that there would be continued improvement to the CEP website and other related website including web activities for kids and updated databases. There will also be continued outreach in recognition of

commemorative environmental days and media engagement.

90. The Fund Management Officer, Ms. Annie Muchai, presented the budget on the Caribbean Trust Fund for 2013-2014. The 2013 budget (US$1.48M) was based on expenditures reported in the previous year, the

projected activities and operating costs, as well as taking into consideration a 3% augmentation in staff cost. In

2014, the budget was higher at US$1.85M noting that the next meetings of the COPs/IGM would take place

then.


Page 13

91. She presented the aggregated budget of the CEP including that for AMEP, SPAW and CETA. A total of

US$3.17M would need to be sourced each year in order to fulfill all the activities in the Workplan, as presented

during the COP Meetings of SPAW and LBS.

92. The organogram of the Secretariat as forecasted for the biennium 2013-2014, reflects a total of 14 staff members: 12 staff members supported through the Caribbean Trust Fund (1 Coordinator, 2 Professional Staff, 9

General Service Staff) and 2 staff members supported through the programme support cost

(1 Administrative/Funds Manager and 1 Finance Assistant). In addition, two Project Staff (1

Professional/Long-Term Consultant, and 1 Administrative Assistant) would continue on staff. The post of

Deputy Coordinator will remain frozen due to limited funds. For CETA activities, a UN Volunteer (UNV) is

under recruitment, given the lack of funds to support a full time professional officer. In total, the Secretariat

will remain at 16 staff overall, compared to 24 staff in 2010/2011.

93. The Secretariat called on the need to consider increasing the budget by 5% in 2014 and complemented that this was intended also to allow for the recruitment of a full time position for a CETA Programme Officer in the

course of the biennium.

94. The delegate of France stated that his Government could not endorse an increase in contributions, despite recognizing the increase in costs, including that of personnel.

95. The delegate of the United States of America thanked the Secretariat for the presentations on the Workplan and budget. The United States could not agree to an increase in the budget and asked for a zero nominal growth

budget over the next two years.

96. The delegate of Mexico also expressed appreciation for the presentations by the Secretariat but recognizing the difficulties in accepting an increase in budget.

97. Given the constraints faced by Member States in light of the current global economic situation and the interventions to that effect, Mr. Andrade Colmenares stated that, despite the increase in cost of operations, the

Secretariat‟s budget for 2014 would remain the same; there would be zero nominal growth.

98. The Secretariat presented the recommendations of the LBS STAC 1 (adopted by LBS COP 1 on 24 October 2012) and the decisions of the First COP of the LBS Protocol, as found in the document UNEP (DEPI) CAR

WG.32/4.; as well as the recommendations of the SPAW STAC 5 (adopted by SPAW COP 7 on 22 October

2012) and the decisions of the SPAW COP 7, as found in the document UNEP (DEPI) CAR IG. 31/3.

99. Mr. Felton Gilmore, IMO Senior Consultant, presented the recommendations of the Sixth Ordinary Meeting of the Steering Committee of the Regional Activity Centre /Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Information

and Training Centre, RAC/REMPEITC Caribe which took place in Willemstad, Curacao, 9 – 10 May 2012, and

found in the document titled UNEP (DEPI)/CAR IG. 33/4.

100. The Chairperson invited delegates to comment on the decisions of the SPAW COP7 and LBS COP1. No objections were received from Member delegates and the decisions were duly approved by the Meeting.

101. The delegate of the United States of America stated that his country was pleased to continue its support to the RAC-REMPEITC Center and the adoption of its 2012-2013 Work Plan. He wished to acknowledge the work

of the Center‟s director Dr. Thomas Smith since 2005. Under his leadership, RAC-REMPEITC has provided a

steady and diverse array of technical programs throughout the wider Caribbean. Those programmes would not

have been possible without the secondment of subject matter experts and administrative staff from France,

Curacao, and the USA. Those seconded are critical in helping member states understand and implement

effective enforcement and compliance regimes aimed at protecting and preserving the marine environment

throughout the Wider Caribbean.

102. He furthermore urged other Member States to note the benefits accrued by the work of the Center and to reaffirm their support as well as considering offers to second one or more additional experts to the Center for

periods of two to three years.


Page 14

103. The delegate of the United States of America acknowledged the role that UNEP CEP, the IMO, and

RAC/REMPEITC has played in the last year in initiating a series of multi-lateral meetings around the region,

particularly to facilitate sharing of plans, strategies for response as well as operating procedures and guidelines

for how impacted and threatened nations will coordinate information and response operations if a spill should

occur. He thanked the Secretariat and the IMO for the role played thus far, and encourage continued support

under both organizations for this initiative.

AGENDA ITEM 7: ELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE MONITORING COMMITTEE ON THE

ACTION PLAN FOR THE CARIBBEAN ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME FOR

2013-2014 BIENNIUM

104. The Secretariat, based on consultations with Member States, introduced a proposal with a list of nominees for composition of the Monitoring Committee. The proposal took into account geographic representation and with

due consideration to the composition of the outgoing Monitoring Committee members. The nominees are

Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Costa Rica, France, the Netherlands, Mexico and the United States of America.

The Chairperson invited delegates to comment on the election of the members for the 2013-2014 Monitoring

Committee.

105. The delegations of Mexico and the United States of America, expressed that they were honoured to be nominated and serve as members of the Committee.

106. The Monitoring Committee was then approved with the composition proposed above.

AGENDA ITEM 8: OTHER BUSINESS

107. The Meeting was invited to raise any other matter not covered by the preceding Agenda items, but relevant to the scope of the Meeting. Invited observers were also invited to make short presentations of relevance to the

objectives of the Meeting.

108. The delegate of Mexico introduced a proposal of a draft resolution referring to the greater participation of Parties in the recruitment process of the Coordinator of CEP, which can be found in Annex IX.

109. Ms. Jacqueline Alder from the UNEP Headquarters thanked Mexico for the proposal, which is taken very seriously since UNEP strives to ensure secretariats are managed efficiently and cost effective. UNEP responded

specifically to Mexico‟s proposal indicating that the decision was not in line with the United Nations Charter in

particular Article 101 – “The staff shall be appointed by the Secretary General under the regulations established

by the General Assembly”. Providing the names of candidates amounts to publicizing their interest in the

position and breaks the confidentiality rules. Member states can communicate their support for a candidate

from their country, and similarly the President of the Bureau can convey on behalf of the parties support for a

candidate. However, the Executive Director will primarily take a decision based on the report of the recruitment

panel, which will have followed a well-defined process for reviewing and interviewing applicants. With

regards to some issues outlined in the proposal, it would imply an upgrade to the post and approval from UN

New York. Given the current financial challenges for the Convention, approval is unlikely unless parties agree

to regularly increase their pledges to cover the increased salary costs. It was also pointed out that changing a

coordinator will incur additional costs in separation and in recruitment of a new coordinator; possibly in the

range of USD 80,000 to 100,000 every time this process takes place. She also mentioned that there are various

options for managing the Secretariat and if Parties would like that information it can be provided. However, if

Parties wish UNEP to manage the Secretariat on their behalf, there was little scope for changing the current

recruitment arrangements.

110. The delegation of Cuba thanked the Secretariat and Ms. Jacqueline Alder of UNEP, for the detailed explanation provided regarding the selection process and implications of the proposed mechanism. In this regard, the

Government of Cuba maintains the position that the objective of the Meeting is to deliberate on the

achievements of the Programme during the 2011-2012 biennium, and to set the Workplan for the 2013-2014.


Page 15

Therefore, the delegation of Cuba considers that this proposal from México will distort the objectives of the

Meeting.

111. The delegation of Cuba also noted that in the last 14th Intergovernmental Meeting convened in 2010, the approved decisions on this topic had not been fully completed, such as Decision VI which requested from the

Government of Mexico to present a report to the Parties at this Meeting. Additionally, they noted that while

Rule of Procedure No. 11: “Suplementary Items” allows a Party to introduce items in the agenda of a meeting,

Rule of Procedure No. 12 notes that the Contracting Parties will include in the agenda of an ordinary meeting,

items for which the appropriate documents would have been circulated among the members, at least forty-two

days before the start of a meeting. However, this had not been the case on this occasion. Taking into account

these arguments and the good work undertaken by the CEP Secretariat, as well as recognizing that this is a very

complex process which requires in depth analysis, the Government of Cuba is not in agreement, nor in a

position to discuss this proposal.

112. The delegation of Colombia thanked the delegate of Mexico for the proposal and the desire to strengthen the transparent, democratic and inclusive process for the designation of the Coordinator of the Programme and the

Convention. She also thanked the information provided by the Secretariat concerning the UN procedures for

recruitment of candidates wishing to occupy the post of Coordinator, as the explanations provided resolved

some of the questions of the Government of Colombia. The delegation of Colombia also indicated that one of

the main results of Rio+20 for them was the strengthening of UNEP, so the proposal of Mexico could have the

opposite effect if approved.

113. Additionally, the Colombian delegation expressed its concern of setting a precedent for the other Conventions in which UNEP is Secretariat, if the proposal from Mexico were to be approved as presented. It was also stated

by this delegation that to raise the current position of Coordinator to Executive Secretary, Parties would have to

assume the resulting budgetary implications and Parties are not ready to assume these costs given the

discussions on the budget which had taken place during the Meeting.

114. Finally, the Colombian delegation took the opportunity to thank the current Coordinator and acknowledge his work and commitment. It was further stated that is necessary to establish a finite working period for future

Coordinators.

115. The delegate of Mexico mentioned that the proposed decision was sent by the Government of Mexico to some countries which had been participating in the Working Group headed by Mexico.

116. The delegation of the United States of America noted the merit in Contracting Parties having increased involvement in the process of appointing the Coordinator, consistent with UNEP rules and procedures.

Increased involvement by Contracting Parties would be consistent with the CEP‟s broad mandate to “consider

and undertake any other action that may be required for the achievement of the purposes of [the Cartagena

Convention] and its protocols” (Art. 16(7)).

117. Further, he indicated that his Government appreciates Mexico‟s proposal, but noted that such a process would represent a marked variation from UN hiring practices, which could lead to legal difficulties. The USA is also

concerned that under the process proposed by Mexico, the Contracting Parties would consider three candidates

for the position of Executive Secretary and recommend that UNEP select one of the three. This would appear to

be a very public process, which would not maintain the confidentiality of the recommendation or the

deliberations.

118. The Contracting Parties should then consider other means to increase the role of the Parties in selecting the next Coordinator, and the Government of the USA looks forward to engaging on this topic. As a start, they

recommended a process of consultation with the Parties in the selection of the Executive Secretary, and

proposed to look to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) as a model.

119. In concluding the USA delegation reaffirmed its support for the valuable work Mr. Nelson Andrade Colmenares has done as Coordinator of the CEP. His leadership has made the Caribbean Environment

Programme a globally-respected one that has pioneered many important projects and international agreements.


Page 16

120. As a result of discussions the Chairperson established a Working Group to address the above mentioned

matters. Member of the Working Group included the Governments of Colombia, Cuba, France, Jamaica,

Mexico, the United States of America, and the representative of UNEP Headquarters.

121. In continuing with other items, the Chairperson invited the representatives of the World Bank to present the Global Partnership on Oceans, which seeks, among others, to achieve sustainable livelihoods from fisheries and

aquaculture and pollution reduction. A proposal was made to consider the Wider Caribbean as a priority region

for this initiative.

122. The representative of the Caribbean Biological Corridor (for Haiti, Dominican Republic and Cuba) addressed the Meeting, highlighting areas of possible cooperation with member countries of the Cartagena Convention, in

particular with regard to protected areas, ecosystem restoration and human resource training.

123. The Coordinator of the Project “Mitigating the Threat of Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean (MTIASIC)” introduced this initiative informing that it is funded by the GEF and implemented by UNEP with

CABI as the regional executing agency. Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Saint Lucia and Trinidad

and Tobago are participating countries. The project‟s objective is to mitigate the threat to local biodiversity and

economy from invasive alien species in the insular Caribbean.

124. The Director of the SPAW-RAC made a presentation on the progress made since the last SPAW-COP 6 with regard to the efforts for the control of the lionfish invasion in the Wider Caribbean, in particular the publishing

of a manual and the development of a regional strategy for control with partners such as US-NOAA, ICRI and

the Governments of Mexico and France.

125. The representative of the GEF -Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Project provided a detailed presentation on the status of the Project and upcoming activities, in particular the finalization and endorsement by participating

governments of the SAP (Strategic Action Programme). The Project which focuses on governance issues

regarding the sustainable use of living marine resources currently emphasizes fisheries management as the

priority area.

126. The representative of LATINOSAN introduced the new challenges and opportunities of this initiative. The III Latin American Sanitation Conference (LATINOSAN) will be held on May 29-31, 2013, in Panama¸ for

strengthening the governments‟ commitment to include sanitation in their political and public agendas.

127. The representative of UNESCO IOC expressed the long standing spirit of cooperation of the IOCARIBE and CEP on strengthening of Member States capacities to respond to their commitments within CEP, in particular

cooperation on activities relevant to marine pollution and to the Oils Spills and LBS Protocols. Over the last

years, collaboration has focused on the Assessment of Assessments of the State of the Oceans Report that lead

to the UN Regular Process for the global reporting on the state of the marine environment, including socio-

economic aspects (Regular Process). This will entail the joint convening of the UN Regional Workshop to be

held in Miami, November 2012.

128. With regard to the CLME Project the delegation of the United States of America expressed strong support to develop more holistic governance for transboundary marine issues in the Wider Caribbean Region, including

issues related to oil spills, specially protected areas and wildlife, land-based sources of pollution and

management of shared living marine resources, including regional fisheries interests.

129. With the regard to the presentation made by the Secretariat on the template being developed to report on the implementation of the Cartagena Convention, a number of delegations raised suggestions. In particular, the

delegations of Antigua and Barbuda and the United States of America raised constructive comments. The latter

delegation seeks to add questions to Section 8 (concerning the SPAW Protocol) of the current version of the

Convention Reporting Template, to consider and address how countries contribute to the SPAW protocol

objectives and activities. The existing template questions address actions, changes and procedures implemented

by countries in their conservation legislation, protected species status, and protected area designation as a result

of, or to comply with, the SPAW Protocol. However, the template should also include questions that describe

how actions taken by countries irrespective of the SPAW protocol could benefit, improve, and/or contribute to

advancing and enhancing SPAW protocol implementation. The United States of America provided such


Page 17

additional questions to the Secretariat, which will be circulated to the Parties for information and consideration

at the 16th

IGM and 13th

COP at the latest.

130. The Secretariat provided a summary of the countries who had submitted reports using the reporting template. These included the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Colombia, Costa Rica, the United States of America, and

Venezuela. The focal point from Guyana also informed that their report was completed and would be sent

formally shortly.

131. The Secretariat outlined some of the key issues highlighted in the reports received including pollution from ships, pollution emergencies, improving cooperation between Contracting Parties, ratification of the Cartagena

Convention and its Protocols, difficulties in estimating pollutant loads and the need to strengthen national laws

and policies for meeting the obligations of the Convention and the Protocols. Contracting Parties were

encouraged to submit their reports for future IGMs which would allow the Secretariat to summarize and present

as a formal information document for the next IGM.

132. The Secretariat presented short videos illustrating the results of several projects and collaborative efforts of the UNEP-CEP, namely the SPAW/Italian Government project in support of MPAs in Grenada under the

framework of the Caribbean Challenge; the impacts of the successful GEF IWCAM activities on local

communities; the significant consequences of marine litter on the marine environment in particular plastic.

133. The Meeting welcomed the valuable information provided through the different presentations highlighting the opportunities for collaboration and synergies with a number of relevant initiatives and partners. In this context,

specific decisions were brought forward as reflected in Annex III of this Report.

AGENDA ITEM 9: ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

134. The Rapporteur presented the English version of the draft Report of the Meeting. The Meeting adopted the Report with amendments and corrections, which were included by the Secretariat in the revised document. The

Secretariat agreed to circulate the revised version of the draft in English, French and Spanish within 45 days,

after which Delegates would have 15 days to review and provide comments to the Secretariat..

AGENDA ITEM 10: CLOSURE OF THE MEETING

135. In his closing remarks, the Coordinator made mention of the excellent results of the Meeting, in large measure due to the active and constructive participation of the delegates, which had produced a number of decisions that

would enable the Secretariat to continue its work for the biennium 2013-2014. He thanked the members of the

elected Bureau, particularly the Rapporteur who had worked long hours with the Secretariat, and the

Chairperson, who had guided the participants smoothly through the Meeting. He expressed special thanks to the

UNEP Representative from Nairobi, Ms. Jacqueline Alder, for her valuable assistance. He expressed his sincere

thanks to the staff of the Secretariat of the Cartagena Convention including the GEF Project Managers and the

dedicated professionals of the three RACs. The interpreters and members of the team from the Dominican

Republic responsible for the logistical organization of the Meeting were also acknowledged for their support.

136. In conclusion, Mr. Andrade Colmenares thanked the delegates once again for their continuing support of the Cartagena Convention and its Protocols, as relevant as ever to addressing issues pertaining to marine pollution

and to the loss of biodiversity, as well as observers and key partners for their spirit of cooperation.

137. The Chairperson thanked the delegates and observers for their participation, which had resulted in a successful Meeting and urged Member Countries to continue their active participation and contributions to the Cartagena

Convention and its Protocols. She thanked the Coordinator for his sterling leadership of the Secretariat and

commented that the Convention was a model within the Regional Seas Programme of which all members could

be proud. The Chairperson thanked everyone at the meeting again and closed by stating that she looked forward

to the exciting new biennium ahead, wishing all a safe return to their countries.


Page 19

ANNEX I: AGENDA


Annex I, Page 1

AGENDA

1. Opening of the Meeting

2. Organisation of the Meeting

2.1. Rules of Procedure

2.2. Election of Officers

REPORT OF THE MEETING€¦ · Fifteenth Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for the...

Documents

Transcript of REPORT OF THE MEETING€¦ · Fifteenth Intergovernmental Meeting on the Action Plan for the...